In early 2026, the US Department of Justice released over three million pages of material linked to the late financier Jeffrey Epstein — court filings, emails, depositions, flight logs, and sealed exhibits accumulated over decades.
Buried within the documents were repeated references to Epstein’s private island in the US Virgin Islands, Little Saint James, a place that survivors, investigators and locals alike came to associate with secrecy, abuse and impunity.
What stunned readers was not merely the volume of paperwork, but what those records contained. Victim testimonies and sworn statements describe organised child trafficking, repeated sexual abuse of minors, cannibalism, ritual killings, intimidation, and systematic exploitation in secluded locations, with Little Saint James appearing again and again as a focal point.
Some filings record allegations of extreme violence and ritualised abuse. These claims are documented as allegations within legal records, not established facts, but their presence in sworn material has reignited global outrage.
The fallout was immediate. In India, reports noted that an internal email referencing Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s 2017 Israel visit appeared in the files, a claim the Ministry of External Affairs dismissed as “trashy ruminations by a convicted criminal.”
In the United States, President Donald Trump was mentioned thousands of times across documents related to Epstein’s social and logistical networks. The DOJ has repeatedly stated that many sensational online claims lack corroboration and do not warrant charges.
Yet the deeper question remains unavoidable: how did a private island evolve into a space where alleged crimes could continue for years, powerful figures were rumoured to circulate, and enforcement struggled to intervene?
LITTLE SAINT JAMES: FROM TROPICAL PARADISE TO GLOBAL NOTORIETY
Little Saint James is a small private island in the US Virgin Islands, a US territory in the Caribbean. Epstein purchased it in 1998 and later bought the neighbouring Great Saint James in 2016 for over $20 million.
Civil lawsuits filed by the Virgin Islands government and survivors allege the island functioned as a controlled environment where underage girls were trafficked, isolated and abused.
Victims described recruitment through money or promises of work, followed by coercion and fear once on the island. Its reputation became so dark that locals openly referred to it as “paedophile island.”
After Epstein’s alleged death in 2019, investigations intensified. In 2022, his estate agreed to a settlement exceeding $105 million with the Virgin Islands. The islands were sold in 2023, though redevelopment has been slow and legally fraught.
WHO WAS NAMED AS VISITING OR LINKED TO EPSTEIN ISLAND
Court filings, flight logs, emails and witness statements reference a wide network of powerful individuals who were either alleged to have visited Little Saint James or were mentioned in connection with Jeffrey Epstein’s operations.
Donald Trump appears extensively across social records, contact lists and testimonies linked to Epstein’s social circle, though US authorities have stated that allegations circulating online remain unverified. Apart from the US President, the most scrutinised association remains Prince Andrew, whose ties to Epstein led to a major civil settlement in 2022.
Among other political figures, former US President Bill Clinton is named in flight logs and witness statements as having travelled on Epstein’s private jet multiple times, a fact he has partly acknowledged while denying any involvement in illegal activity.
Other political names include former New Mexico governor Bill Richardson, former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak and Hillary Clinton, whose name appears in emails but not in flight records.
The files also name leading figures from business, technology and finance, including Bill Gates, hedge fund executive Glenn Dubin, Virgin Group founder Richard Branson, former Barclays CEO Jes Staley, and Les Wexner, Epstein’s longtime associate and former patron.
Tech leaders such as Elon Musk appear in emails discussing potential island visits that were later cancelled, alongside references to Reid Hoffman and Peter Thiel.
Entertainment figures appearing across flight logs, correspondence or contact lists include Leonardo DiCaprio, Diana Ross, Mick Jagger, Naomi Campbell, Kevin Spacey, Woody Allen, Courtney Love, Chris Tucker and magician David Copperfield.
Academics and public intellectuals named in emails include former US Treasury secretary Larry Summers and linguist Noam Chomsky. Spiritual figures like the Dalai Lama and Deepak Chopra also surface in Epstein’s contacts or mentions.
All individuals named have denied wrongdoing or knowledge of Epstein’s crimes. Being named does not establish criminal guilt, as many references stem from address books, jet manifests or correspondence rather than confirmed island visits.
Apart from these few names, the release of the Epstein files have led to a wave of resignations and investigations in various countries.
However, investigators and survivors argue that the sheer prominence of those listed reveals how Epstein’s access to elite circles helped create an environment of silence, shielding abuse through privilege, isolation and power.
LAW, JURISDICTION, AND WHY ENFORCEMENT FAILED
Little Saint James was never “outside the law.” As part of the US Virgin Islands, it falls under US jurisdiction. Crimes committed there are prosecutable under US law.
So why did it function like a blind spot?
- Isolation: Access was controlled by boat or helicopter, limiting visibility
- No permanent enforcement presence: Inspections were rare
- Owner influence: Epstein’s wealth and connections delayed scrutiny
- Control of logistics: Staff, transport and surveillance were privately managed
Victim statements allege abuse escalated precisely because of this isolation. Some filings describe acts so extreme that prosecutors have publicly warned against sensationalism, while confirming such allegations are formally recorded.
Not every claim has been tested in court. But their inclusion in sworn records shows how far abuse can persist when power, privacy and weak oversight converge.
WHY PRIVATE ISLAND LOOPHOLES EXIST ELSEWHERE
In many Caribbean and offshore jurisdictions, private islands are sold like luxury real estate. Oversight depends on local enforcement capacity, which is often limited.
Wealthy owners control access, staffing and infrastructure, creating environments where wrongdoing can remain hidden unless victims escape or whistleblowers emerge.
Little Saint James fit this pattern. Legal ownership existed on paper, but in practice, isolation and influence delayed intervention for years. Privacy, marketed as a luxury, became a shield.
BEYOND EPSTEIN: WHY THE ULTRA-RICH BUY ISLANDS
Private islands attract the wealthy for three main reasons:
- Extreme privacy and exclusivity
- Tax or regulatory advantages
- Status and insulation from scrutiny
Epstein’s case exposed the danger of privacy without accountability. Law still applies, but detection can be delayed long enough for harm to multiply.
COULD A LITTLE SAINT JAMES HAPPEN IN INDIA?
The answer is highly unlikely.
In India, islands are governed like land, and most are government-owned. Private ownership exists only where clear titles already existed, usually from colonial or princely-era grants or cooperative arrangements.
Strategic, environmental and legal barriers are extensive. Coastal Regulation Zone (CRZ) rules, defence clearances, and tribal protections sharply restrict construction, access and use. Ownership never translates into unchecked control.
Only a handful of islands are privately held. Piram Island in Gujarat remains under state oversight and contains government infrastructure. Aves Island in the Andamans is owned by a cooperative society and has a recorded civilian population.
Elsewhere, “private island” projects, such as Capao Island in Goa, are commercial developments under public approvals, not sealed personal estates. Where the government promotes island tourism, it does so through leases and public-private partnerships, not freehold sales.
In short, Indian islands are regulated, monitored and legally visible, structurally hostile to secrecy.
WHAT THIS ALL MEANS NOW
The Epstein files do not just tell the story of one man or one island. They expose how legal ownership, wealth and isolation can hollow out enforcement, even under strong laws.
When governments must issue clarifications about world leaders being named, and when US authorities repeatedly contextualise allegations against powerful figures, it becomes clear this is not ancient history.
Epstein could be dead. His island has changed hands. But the lesson remains urgent: law is only as strong as its ability to reach the powerful, even when crimes hide behind luxury, water and silence.
